[Aptitude-devel] Bug#159584: reverse dependency list should show actual dependency
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo
manuel.montezelo at gmail.com
Thu Jan 28 20:07:50 UTC 2016
Control: tags -1 + pending
Hi Andreas,
2002-09-04 13:23 Andreas Bombe:
>Package: aptitude
>Version: 0.2.11.1-3
>Severity: wishlist
>
>When showing the reverse dependencies aptitude only shows the package
>names and versions. This makes it difficult to see whether the reverse
>depends really requires that exact package or if it's just one
>alternative. You have to enter every package description to find out.
>
>It would be immediately visible if there was a way to display the
>dependency leading to the reverse depends in the list.
I changed this to show it in this way:
--\ Packages which depend on iceweasel (480)
--- Depends (348)
--\ Depends on provided gnome-www-browser (1)
p cinnamon-desktop-environment 2.8.0
--\ Depends on provided www-browser (69)
p bibus-doc-en 1.5.2-4
p browser-plugin-packagekit 1.0.11-1
p c-cpp-reference 2.0.2-8
p cppreference-doc-en-html 20151129+dfsg0-1
p drgeo-doc 1.5-7
p fish 2.2.0-3
p fsl-5.0-core 5.0.8-5
p gimp-help-ca 2.8.2-0.1
p gimp-help-de 2.8.2-0.1
p gimp-help-el 2.8.2-0.1
p gimp-help-en 2.8.2-0.1
p gimp-help-es 2.8.2-0.1
p gimp-help-fr 2.8.2-0.1
p gimp-help-it 2.8.2-0.1
p gimp-help-ja 2.8.2-0.1
p gimp-help-ko 2.8.2-0.1
[...]
--- Recommends (30)
--- Recommends on provided www-browser (67)
--- Suggests (34)
--- Suggests on provided www-browser (125)
--- Enhances (66)
--- Conflicts (2)
It doesn't help for all cases with alternatives, but at least if one
sees that the dependency is on a provided package, one can easily find
if there are other alternatives that might fit the bill.
For example, if there is any package installed which "Depends" on
iceweasel (like "iceweasel-l10-ms" or "xul-ext-blah"), probably cannot
be uninstalled, but if the only ones installed are those depending on
"www-browser" provided by iceweasel, one can substitute iceweasel for
another browser.
Showing the OR dependencies and alternatives is quite difficult to
implement in the way that things work, that's probably why the bug has
been unfixed for 13+ years, and quite might be quite computationally
intensive for packages with hundreds of rev-deps, so I think that this
is an acceptable fix.
Cheers.
--
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo at gmail.com>
More information about the Aptitude-devel
mailing list